Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 85.6 | 83.8 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| Android 11 | -- |
| 2021-08-11 | 2019-03-15 |
| 6.54 x 2.84 x 0.27 inches | 6.24 x 2.93 x 0.30 inches |
| 6.46 ounces | 5.86 ounces |
| Cream, Lavender and Phantom Black | Black, Blue, Coral and White |
| Aluminum and Glass | Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 1000.00 | $ 202.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.7 inches | 6.4 inches |
| 2636 x 1080 pixels | 2340 x 1080 pixels |
| Dynamic AMOLED | Super AMOLED |
| 425 pixels per inch | 403 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.3 | 8.1 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 SM8350 chipset | Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 9610 chipset |
| Kryo 680, 64-bit, 5 nm (Octa-Core 2840 MHz) processor | ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 660 GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 GPU |
| 9.63 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 10.1 | 14.14 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 10.00 MP | 25.00 MP + 25.00 MP |
| f/1.80 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| -- | 27.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution |
| -- | 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 7.92 | 10.12 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| 5G, 5G, LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 10.6 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 3300mAh Nano SIM Battery | 4000mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 5.28 | 5.92 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.1 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 has a global score of 85.6, which is slightly better than Galaxy A50's overall score of 83.8. The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 construction is a lot newer and just a little thinner than the Galaxy A50's, but it is also a little bit heavier. The Galaxy Z Flip 3 features a bit sharper display than Galaxy A50, because it has a slightly higher resolution of 1080 x 2636px, a little bit higher count of pixels in each inch in the screen and a bit bigger screen.
The Samsung Galaxy A50 has a much bigger memory to store more apps and games than Galaxy Z Flip 3, and although they both have the same internal memory, the Samsung Galaxy A50 also has a slot for external memory cards that allows a maximum of 512 GB. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 features a little bit better performance than Galaxy A50, and although they both have the same number of cores, the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 also has more RAM memory.
Galaxy A50 takes much better pictures and videos than Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3, because it has a way more mega pixels camera in the back and a bigger diafragm aperture to take better captures and video in low-light environments. Galaxy A50 counts with superior battery lifetime than Galaxy Z Flip 3, because it has a 21 percent more battery capacity.
Although Galaxy Z Flip 3 is a better device, it is way more expensive than Galaxy A50, and it doesn't have such a good quality/price relation as the Galaxy A50. If you are trying to save a few dollars, you can get Galaxy A50, giving up a few features and specifications, but you'll get the most out of your budget.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.